When Liverpool stops being polite...and starts getting Real: The UCL Final
- Thread starter 67YAZ
- Start date
So direct by Liverpool. Lots of chances but you would think that if they use the width of the field even just a bit it would create a few gaps. They don’t need much.
So far, this is a game with one team that never gets pressured facing a team that’s too tired to pressure to plan.
Totally agree. COuple of times i wanted DIaz to skin the defender get to the bye line and put a ball in, but he came inside and ran into trouble. Madrid are not a side that wants to run around. So make the pitch big. Where are the Robbo/Diaz overlaps? Shit like that.
Liverpool having to defend without touching the Madrid attackers. Going to leave them really vulnerable.
Fuck, that was a dive by Diaz. I don’t want to see him get frustrated- he hasn’t done that since Porto.
His lack of economy of movement and his random mistakes are more what I’m after. Both telegraph significantly.
I guess the question is if the last touch in that scrum was a deliberate touch by a Liverpool player.
It also looked like he may have been offside on the initial run, but don’t know if that was part of the review.
Offside rule benefited the team that made a complete hash out of it and so was out of position. But it did look like the ball was played with intent. Barely.
I have equally negative biases toward both teams. I thought that should have been a goal.
Making a tackle is intent to play the ball.
VAR released the offside picture on the second play so maybe they review in order and once decided that was off they don’t even look? Maybe they would have reviewed if the second was on.
Define irony: CBS airing a special for the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee while its northern neighbor, which has the Queen on its money, has no such announced plan.
Curious as to the actual reasoning in this one. konate seemed to slide in with the intent of playing the ball, maybe not how he actually did play it though. Plus the previous touch came from a Liverpool player, though I’m not sure how much that matters.
Offside is another rule, like handball, that is proving impossible to write down. You don’t want a situation where a defender swings and gets a part of a stud on it, deflecting it slightly, to negate offside, you you put intent language in. And then this happens.
I buy Henry’s argument. The defender was tackling with his right leg and missed and deflected it with his left thigh, so therefore not deliberately.
you mean Canada? I'm not sure any other US news network is doing a special. CBS must have data that their primetime demo is interested in the royal family